Miss Gloria Gomwalk & Anor V. Military Administrator Of Plateau State & Ors (2011)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ABUBAKAR DATTI YAHAYA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The appellants as plaintiffs, took out a writ of Summons out of the High Court of Plateau state, Jos on the 27/4/2000, and in their joint statement of claim, they prayed, against the defendants jointly and severally, for the following reliefs –

“(a) A DELCARATION that the Plaintiffs are the rightful owners by inheritance entitled to the exclusive use, enjoyment and occupation of Nos. 13 and 18 Ahmadu Bello Way, Jos.

(b) A PERPETUAL INJUNCTION restraining the Defendants by themselves, agents, privies assigns, heirs or servants from further acts of trespass unto Nos. 13 and 18 Ahmadu Bellow Way, Jos in any way howsoever.”

The defendants denied the claim and filed their statements of defence. However, before trial could commence, the 6th defendant, who is now the 6th respondent, filed a Motion on Notice dated the 15/6/2000, for –

“An Order dismissing the Plaintiffs’ claim for being res judicata.”

He exhibited a copy of the earlier judgment he was relying upon – PLD/J237/92. The appellants filed a counter-affidavit. After counsel for the parties had addressed the court, it examined the issues in Suit No. PLD/J237/92, Edict No. 6 of 1975 – The sale of property (Revocation) Edict-and Exhibit 2, and concluded by holding that the two properties in issue – Nos. 13 and 18 Ahmadu Bello Way Jos, were vested in the “Benue Plateau State Government” and that the judgment in Suit No. PLD/J237/92 (Exhibit 4) is a judgment in rem, against all persons, operating as Res Judicata” The claim of the appellants was therefore dismissed. Dissatisfied with the ruling delivered on the 13/7/2000, the appellants filed an appeal before this court, on three grounds.

In their Amended Appellants Brief filed on the 18/6/2007, their counsel, Mr. T. A. Adudu identified three issues for determination in this appeal. They are –

“1. whether a judgment obtained is respect of land is a judgment in rem or is a judgment in personam (Ground 1).

2. Whether in the entire circumstances of this case the plaintiffs are privies to Benue and Plateau states Government to justify the holding of Res-Judicata against them in order to oust their interest on the two properties. (Ground 2).
3. Whether it was right for the trial judge to pronounce on who the properties were vested on, when that was one of the issues submitted to the court for determination in the substantive matter. (Ground 3).”

The 1st, 2nd and 7th respondents filed their Amended Brief on the 25/5/2009 but were deemed filed on the 26/10/2009. They also identified three Issues for determination, similar to those identified by the appellants.

The 3rd, 4th and 5th respondents’ Amended Brief filed on the 11/3/2009, was deemed filed on the 26/10/2009. They adopted the issues identified by the 6th Respondent.

The 6th Respondent filed his Amended Brief on 27/7/2007 also identifying three issues viz –

1. Whether the judgment obtained in suit No. PLD/237/92 in respect of Nos. 13 and 18 Ahmadu Bello Way, Jos is a judgment in REM or is a judgment in PERSONAM.
2. Whether in the entire circumstances of this case the plaintiffs are privies to Benue and Plateau States Government to justify the holding of Res Judicata against them in order to oust their interest on the two properties.
3. Whether by his reference to the vesting of Ownership of property Nos. 13 and 18 Ahmadu Bello Way Jos, in the Benue State Government, the learned Trial Judge decided the substantive issue at interlocutory stage.”

As all the issues identified by the parties are very similar, I shall utilize those issues identified by the appellant. In so doing, I shall take up the 3rd issue first. It is –

ISSUE NO. 3